TAPPING A HIDDEN MARKET:
ADVANTAGES OF UNIVERSAL DESIGN IN
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PRODUCTS
Mirabella, Mathew J. Telstra Research Laboratories, Telstra Corporation Limited, Melbourne, Australia
Pedlow, Robert. 2005-06 Ed Roberts Fellow, University of California, Berkeley, USA
ABSTRACT
Research has shown that as people age, they are more likely to acquire a disability. As a result of the aging
population, the number of people with disabilities is increasing which implies that in the case of some
telecommunications services, it may be more cost effective to include universal design principles as a normal part of
the design of these mainstream telecommunications products. This paper shows how universal design can be a low
cost opportunity for providers and manufacturers to tap into a larger market of older people with mild to moderate
disabilities who do not identify as having a disability and who therefore cannot use specialist programs exclusively
for people registered as having a disability.
KEYWORDS: Aging, disability, accessibility, universal design, telecommunications.
1.
INTRODUCTION
Universal design refers to adherence to a set of design principles that aim to optimise the accessibility,
usability and usefulness of a product for people with the widest possible range of functional abilities. This
is distinguished from the approach of designing specialist products to accommodate the specific needs of
people with particular disabilities.
A number of studies and reports on the accessibility of telecommunications for people with disabilities
and older Australians have recommended that telecommunications carriers and manufacturers of
equipment should move towards the use of universal design for consumer products (e.g. Owens and
Smith, 2001). The majority of research studies on which these recommendations are based are either
qualitative in nature or have used convenience samples. These studies often present arguments that are
based on the ABS 2003 figure of 20% as being the proportion of the population with a disability. This is
recognised as an overall figure, and more detailed inspection of the ABS data suggests that it may not
include some groups of people who could benefit from universal design such as those people with
disabilities but who do not identify as having a disability.
Specialist disability services and equipment are important, in particular for the benefit of those consumers
with profound disabilities (such as deafness or total blindness). For example, Telstra
(http://www.telstra.com.au/disability) provides a Disability Equipment Program (DEP), which provides
specialized terminal equipment such as TTYs and Braille TTYs. These specialist programs should, and
often do, employ universal design principles. For example, Telstra has recently included a large button
phone in the DEP with a number of features (such as flashing lights, tactile surfaces and large print labels)
that benefit people with a range of disabilities.
However, in addressing the impact of the aging population and the gap in access to products for people
with mild or moderate levels of disability but who do not identify as, or even see themselves as having a
disability, we believe there are additional opportunities for universality in mainstream design. For
example, Telstra has introduced a standard phone handset designed with a few universal features,
including a volume control, tactile buttons and hearing aid compatibility. This handset can be used by a
range of consumers with mild and moderate levels of disability without these people needing to avail
themselves of the DEP. As a result, it is likely that the cost of equipment and maintenance of specialist
programs will reduce. For example, this company had a reduction in distribution of specialist volume
control phones from 20,339 to 7,023 just after the introduction of the standard handset that has a volume
control, (ACA Telecommunications Performance Report 2003-04).
1
The present paper describes the characteristics of the proportion of the Australian population who might
derive benefit from universal design in mainstream telecommunications products. In doing so, the
following three categories of Australian consumer are considered.
A. People who meet the criteria for disability, and who identify as having a disability.
(Approximately 20% of the Australian population according to the ABS 2003).
B. Older Australians (over 65 years of age).
C. Older Australians (over 65 years of age) who meet the criteria for disability but who do not
identify as having a disability, rather putting any perceived functional limitations down to old age.
Logically, people from Categories C would derive as much benefit from universal design considerations
as those from Category A, but they don’t have the opportunity to do so unless mainstream products are
designed with some universal principles in mind. As Category C is a subset of Category B, it is likely that
category C will experience growth in the Australian population as Category B grows due to the aging
population.
This paper does not suggest that all mainstream telecommunications products should be subject to
universal design. For example, it would be nonsensical to suggest that TTY functionality should be
provided in every standard phone handset. However, the paper deals with category C and recognises that
a degree of low cost universality in mainstream products may open up access to a range of consumers and
thus widen the market available to providers and manufacturers, while at the same time reducing the cost
of supporting those customers with a disability.
2.
CATEGORY B: THE AGING POPULATION
How will the aging of the Australian population change the size and composition of the group of
Australians likely to experience difficulty in accessing telecommunications products? It is important to
understand trends in the size and composition of this group to properly evaluate the case for introducing
changes intended to benefit this group.
As age is associated with an increased incidence of disability, it is expected that the aging population will
result in an increase in the numbers of people with disabilities. Table 1 shows projected increases in the
numbers of people with a disability likely to experience difficulty in interacting with fixed or mobile
phones, (extrapolated figures based on ABS 2003 data assuming a constant overall rate of disability in the
population). The projected number of people aged 65 years or older in 2011 (ABS, 2003), was multiplied
by the rate of vision impairment for this age bracket in 2003, to arrive at the projected number of people
aged 65 and over with a vision impairment in 2011.
Table 1: Extrapolated ‘000s of people with disabilities by age group 2006 – 2021: (ABS 2003)
Disability
Vision
Hearing
Speech
Dexterity
Cognitive
Mobility
Totals
Age Range
0-65yrs
65yrs+
0-65yrs
65yrs+
0-65yrs
65yrs+
0-65yrs
65yrs+
0-65yrs
65yrs+
0-65yrs
65yrs+
0-65yrs
65yrs+
2006
126.7
173.8
463
692.2
186.3
31.7
178.4
142.6
425.4
163.4
1587.1
900.2
2966.9
2103.9
2
2011
133.3
201.6
488.6
802.8
192.2
36.8
188.3
165.3
440
189.5
1674
1043.9
3116.4
2439.9
2021
142.3
288.8
520.3
1150.4
202.6
52.7
201.2
236.9
465.2
271.6
1788.7
1495.9
3320.3
3496.3
The results show increases in the numbers of people with all disabilities likely to have restricted access to
telecommunications products. As we would expect, the great majority of the increase is associated with
the increase in numbers of people aged over 65 years. With the exception of speech impairments by 2021,
for all other categories of disability, the number of people with a disability aged over 65 years will be
greater than the number aged less than 65. As people age, they may begin to lose their hearing or vision,
and as a result, will experience greater difficulty using the same standard telephone equipment that they
had been using for many years previously.
For older people acquiring even a mild disability due to aging, the access issues may manifest quite
differently from people having a disability at a young age. For example, the prevalence of new mobile
phones that have smaller keypad sizes may be difficult for an older person to use as they lose their
dexterity due to aging, but may be easier to use for those growing up in a world where such devices are
becoming commonplace.
A number of studies have investigated accessibility of the fixed phone service for older people and people
with disabilities in Australia (e.g. Owens and Smith, 2001). Despite this attention to accessibility, no
studies have investigated the importance of category C in terms of the proportion of people in Australia
who may derive benefit from universality in mainstream design. The present paper reviews relevant UK
research on this issue, but we recognise that determining the size of Category C is difficult, and more
research in this area would be useful especially as category C relates to the broader domain of disability
studies.
3.
CATEGORY C: AGING AND DISABILITY: THE UNTAPPED MARKET
With respect to Category C, there is currently little data concerning the proportion of people in the
Australian population meeting the criteria for disability but who do not identify as having a disability.
This is a significant question because identifying as having a disability is a pre-requisite step to accessing
programs that offer specialist support for people with disabilities.
A study conducted by the Royal National Institute for the Blind (RNIB) in the UK investigated this issue
with respect to people with vision impairment in the UK population, (Bruce, Mckennel and Walker,
1998). The study gathered measures of visual status from a stratified random sample of the population and
used statistical modelling to estimate the population of people with vision impairment. The study also
collected data on whether people tested were registered as blind or partially sighted with their local
authority. Under the UK model registration represents a key step for people with a vision impairment to
access information and services and thus constitutes a strong indicator as to whether individuals identify
as having a disability. A summary of the findings of this study is shown in Table 2.
Table 2: Percentages of people with vision-impairment registered as blind / partially sighted (PS):
(Bruce, Mckennel and Walker (1998).
Registration Status
Registered %
Not registered %
Total %
Base Population ‘000s
Number interviewed
16-59 yrs
Blind
60
40
100
30
137
PS
25
75
100
47
162
60-74 yrs
Blind
43
57
100
65
55
PS
13
87
100
115
69
75+ yrs
Blind
30
70
100
205
75
PS
13
87
100
295
97
All ages
Blind
36
64
100
300
267
PS
13
77
100
457
328
The authors estimated that 23% of people meeting the criteria for registration as blind or partially sighted
were in fact registered. Statistical analysis showed that the likelihood of registration was strongly
associated with age, that is, younger people were more likely to register and people with less residual
vision were more likely to register. The analyses showed that these factors were independent predictors of
registration status. These findings suggest that at least with regard to age, the majority of older people may
not identify as having a disability.
3
Sturgis, Thomas, Purdon, Bridgewood and Dodd (2001) reported in their review of health state measures
of the UK population that older respondents show a strong tendency to discount conditions and
disabilities, regarding functional limitations as the inevitable consequence of old age. They showed that,
as a result, older people under-report long-term illness and disability. Further, regardless of whether they
see themselves as having a disability, there is evidence that older people are often very unwilling to buy
and use “disability” equipment, (Cowan and Turner-Smith, 1999).
It is therefore reasonable to suggest a high likelihood that the proportion of people from category C in the
Australian population is similarly significant, at least in terms of being an important factor in the
determination of the number of people likely to derive benefit from universality in design.
4.
CONCLUSION
Considering there is likely to be an increase in the number of people with disabilities and functional
limitations due to aging, this paper suggests that the incremental cost of universal design may yield a
significant return due to the opportunity to address a larger market of consumers. The paper is not
suggesting the use of universal design to make all mainstream products accessible to everyone. Specialist
disability equipment programs are recognised as one important arm of access to people with profound
disabilities, but a little universal design in the mainstream goes a long way to improving access to a wide
range of users. It also potentially reduces the cost of providing the disability equipment due to avoidance
of the need to supply and maintain a separate stream of items or services.
Providing and maintaining accessible telecommunications products for older people and people with
disabilities presents an important future challenge for Australia, especially when considering the
relationships between carriers and their suppliers (such as mobile handset manufacturers).
Telecommunications carriers face limitations and barriers to inclusion of universality because they are
often dependent on external suppliers for key handsets (such as mobiles) or other equipment used by their
customers. So the call is for all stakeholders, including carriers and manufacturers, to look for
opportunities to employ principles of universal design for their offerings because it can make economic
sense.
This paper also calls for studies to continue to substantiate categories A, B and especially C in the
Australian population. This includes continued research into the understanding of those markets that
would be untapped by design programs that do not include universality as an important component. For
example, people who do not have disabilities, but who have mild functional limitations. In addition, there
are a number of situations where people need to use equipment in environments where they cannot use
one of their senses, for example, people who cannot hear when they are working in noisy factory
environments.
4
5.
REFERENCES
ACA Reports: Telecommunications Performance Report 2003-04: Chapter 10:
http://www.acma.gov.au/ACMAINTER.2163012:STANDARD:1213273481:pc=PC_60045
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2003). Population projections, Australia 2002-2101.
Bruce, I., Mckennel, A., and Walker, E. (1998). Blind and partially sighted adults in Britain: The RNIB survey.
http://www.rnib.org.uk/xpedio/groups/public/documents/visugate/public_survviadu.hcsp.
Cowan, D and Turner-Smith, A. (1999). The role of assistive technology in alternative models of care for older
people. In With respect to old age: Long Term Care – Rights and Responsibilities: Volume 2. A report by The
Royal Commission on Long Term Care. Chairman: Professor Sir Stuart Sutherland.
Henry, S. L., Law, C., and Barnicle, K. (2001) Adapting the design process to address more customers in more
situations. Presented at the Usability Professionals’ Association Annual Conference.
Owens, J. and Smith, K. (2001). Telecommunications needs of seniors in Victoria. Report to the Commonwealth
Department of Communication Information Technology and the Arts.
Sturgis, P., Thomas, R., Purdon, S., Bridgewood, A. and Dodd, T. (2001). Comparative review and assessment of
key health state measures of the general population. Department of Health London.
Telstra Disability Services, (including the Disability Equipment Program). http://www.telstra.com.au/disability
World Health Organisation. Document A29/INFDOCI/1, Geneva, Switzerland, 1976.
6.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We acknowledge intellectual and editorial support from the Telstra Research Laboratories and Telstra
policy reviews, (Anthony Saliba, Christine Armatas, Belinda Ward, Cathy Papas, Ariane Vrisakis, Gina
Raditsis and Hugh Bradlow). We acknowledge endorsement from Telstra Corporate Relations, Customer
relations and Telstra Disability Services, (Bert Ciavarra and Robert Morsillo). We also acknowledge
support and funding from Telstra Consumer and Marketing, (Anne Stout and Jenny Young).
7.
AUTHOR ADDRESS LIST
Mr Mathew J. Mirabella: R&D Specialist, Centre for Universal Design & Accessibility, Customer
Motivation & Behaviour, Human Factors, Telstra Research Laboratories, Telstra Corporation Limited,
770 Blackburn Road, Clayton VIC 3168, Australia. E-Mail: Mathew.Mirabella@team.telstra.com
Dr Robert Pedlow. Ed Roberts Fellow, 2005-2006 Ed Roberts Postdoctoral Fellowship in Disability
Studies, Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California, Berkeley, 316 Wurster
Hall MC 1870, Berkeley, CA 94720-1870, USA. E-Mail: rpedlow@berkeley.edu
5